eurealist.co.uk

More EU propaganda aimed at children!

The European Union has launched eTwinning, an initiative to encourage the twinning of schools across Europe, using the internet.

The project will provide every child in Europe with the opportunity - at some point in their schooling - to engage and learn with other children from across the continent. They will be able to learn about each other, their school culture and family while practising their ICT skills at the same time.
The action aims to have 30,000 schools in Europe twinned by 2007. Participating schools are to use ICT technologies to build “sustainable partnerships”.
Speaking at a conference last week to launch the action, the European Commissioner responsible for education, Ján Figel, said digital and media literacy were now becoming as important as reading, writing and arithmetic.

On the face of it this appears non controversial, after all who could possible complain about children interacting with others in other parts of the world but the reality is that the EU is using such methods to brainwash children into becoming good little Europeans because they form the future generations and also act as what the EU likes to term multipliers taking the thoughts and ideas they learn at school home with them. This aspect of the EU plans is clearly enonceated by Ján Figel when he says…

School twinning will not only take full advantage of the new opportunities for school cooperation and networking provided by ICT and the internet. It will also reinforce the European dimension in school education, promoting intercultural dialogue and raising awareness among pupils of the cultural and linguistic diversity of Europe.

For further information on the EU Propaganda see…
Federalist Thought Control: The Brussels Propaganda Machine
Europe’s youth is in the eyes of Brussels a legitimate target for indoctrination and are given special treatment. This is because school children are said to be a “very receptive” section of the population and can “perform a messenger function in conveying the message to the home environment, among family and friends. It is the active population of tomorrow’s Europe”. The scandalous attitude of the EU is best illustrated by a document endorsed by DG XXII, which noted that the introduction of the Euro represented:
“…a wonderful opportunity to implant the idea of European citizenship by placing the Euro in its historical perspective, by bringing out the symbolic nature of the Euro as a symbol of peace and economic prosperity, and by giving the Euro a civic dimension.”7
Crucially, the paper states that,
“…[the] education system-and teachers in particular-will have a major role to play in forming and communicating with young people. Young people will often in practice act as go-betweens with the older generations, helping them to familiarise themselves with and embrace the Euro”.
To achieve this the EU has developed teaching aids and educational modules to spread the message. It is worth recalling some of them and their content.
The UK government was hardly any better when its Partners in Europe education package (a small plastic suitcase of glossy brochures), distributed to highlight the UK Presidency of Europe, hinted that schools refusing to acquiesce in the teaching of European identity could face trouble. It stated:
“A European dimension in education is not an explicit part of the inspection framework. However, an inspector will make judgements on a school’s work in promoting the spiritual, moral, cultural and social development of its pupils and preparing them for adult life. To the extent that the school’s European dimension policy and plans contribute to these aspects of school life, they will be reported on both directly and indirectly in an inspection. Schools, which have invested in including a European dimension in the education of all pupils, will wish to draw this to the attention of the schools inspector.”
There is also training for teachers and other educators to promote EU citizenship. Under the Socrates programme teachers receive funding to improve foreign language skills, make study visits, make project planning, or receive in-service teacher training.
A pertinent question to ask is whether UK rules on political lessons in the classroom would rule out such blatant indoctrination. The Education Act 1996 is clear on how political issues should be dealt with if so applied. It stipulates that the education system has a number of important duties and responsibilities.
“The local education authority, governing body and head teacher shall forbid the promotion of partisan political views in the teaching of any subject in the school”. Section 406 of the Education Act 1996
And that all points of view get an airing so that,
“they [the pupils] are offered a balanced presentation of opposing views” Section 407 of the Education Act 1996
Despite an Act of Parliament forbidding political indoctrination and setting out a “duty to secure balanced treatment of political issues” it is clear that these important principles and laws are being blatantly breached. Teachers that rely solely on EU materials to discuss the topic of Europe are failing to present the issues in a balanced and impartial manner and so breach the sections of the Education Act 1996 and are thus breaking the law.
What distinguishes educational writing from propagandist communication is that arguments are honestly addressed, and counter evidence is openly admitted and examined. Yet you would be hard pressed to find the contrary vision of the EU anywhere in the Brussels catalogue. The publication output of the EU not infrequently resembles the communication techniques of both Fascist and Communist totalitarian regimes.